From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from de01egw02.freescale.net (de01egw02.freescale.net [192.88.165.103]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "de01egw02.freescale.net", Issuer "Thawte Premium Server CA" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BADFDDE44 for ; Wed, 4 Jul 2007 07:27:45 +1000 (EST) Received: from de01smr01.freescale.net (de01smr01.freescale.net [10.208.0.31]) by de01egw02.freescale.net (8.12.11/de01egw02) with ESMTP id l63LRdBp015100 for ; Tue, 3 Jul 2007 14:27:39 -0700 (MST) Received: from [10.82.19.112] (ld0162-tx32.am.freescale.net [10.82.19.112]) by de01smr01.freescale.net (8.13.1/8.13.0) with ESMTP id l63LRcGp008867 for ; Tue, 3 Jul 2007 16:27:38 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <468ABF4A.60001@freescale.com> Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 16:27:38 -0500 From: Scott Wood MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org Subject: Should of_device_is_compatible() use strcmp() rather than strncasecmp()? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Is there any particular reason that of_device_is_compatible uses strncasecmp()? Besides the OF spec saying that names (and thus compatibles) are case sensitive, the "n" part screws up matching when a subset of a string is not a more generic version thereof. For example, ucc_geth v. ucc_geth_phy, or fsl,cpm v. fsl,cpm-enet. Does anything actually rely on this behavior? -Scott